Investors Say GM Must Off One Brand

[capriceman]

One Thing Does Wall street make cars????? NO so why should this "experts" tell what the GM should Do!

[Ghost Dog]

As Saturn shares Developement costs with Opel.

Buick/Pontiac Could Share Developement costs with GM Asia Pacific. Global Platforms. One Vehicle on Each Platform.


Delta 2 - Gm Daewoo/Holden/Pontiac- Built in Korea

Epsilon 2- Gm Daewoo/Holden/Buick- Built in Korea and North America

Zeta LWB - Gm Shanghai/Holden/Buick- Built In China and Australia

Zeta SWB- Holden/Pontiac - Built in Australia and the U.S.

ThetaEpsilon- Buick/Holden - Built in Korea

Lambda -Buick/Holden- Built in the U.S

Other things to put Gm on stable Ground.


Sharp products on competive platforms.

A settlement Between GM/Delphi/and the U.A.W that puts out the fire.

Selling Off GMAC and the money Banked for Pension liability and Product developement. (No grotesque 15 billion dollar dividend)

No Dividends till GM is Profitable!

A reasonable to all 2007 U.A.W. Contract.

[91z4me]

Seriously, Buick or Saab should be deep sixed.

[post="48780"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I think the SAAB should disappear from NA as quickly as possible. If it is making a profit in Europe or not should not impact its departure from NA. Let SAAB take away moneys from Europe's pocket and keep its NA budget for Buick and Saturn. I forsee SAAB and Satrun butting heads in a few years and GM doesn't need another Buick vs Oldsmobile battle.

Buick I think will find its niche. A LWB Epsilon, Zeta, and 2 crossovers and it is complete. All product's could be versions of other divisions products and costs could easily be made up for with its higher price point.

[wildcat]

Why do these investors and analysts seem to think that cutting one brand will be enough? Why not cut several? After all, Toyota (or whomever) only has ___ brands. Buick isn't a full line anymore, it's one-third of a brand, with Pontiac and GMC. Cut one and you cut 'em all! They're now strung together. So... leave 'em alone! GM must have thought making them into one sales channel made at least some sense, so leave that alone.

[Cananopie]

In all fairness, the safe companies are, in this order:

Chevrolet
Cadillac
GMC
Hummer

I don't even think there was a slight utterance of the dismissal of these 4 brands.

Saturn
Pontiac
Buick
Saab

in that order those are the 4 unsafe brands, from safest to unsafest, but all have at least 1 reason to be dismissed.

Saab seems like the easiest choice to get rid of. Saab doesn't sell the cars any of the other brands do and Saab doesn't hold the fanbase any of the other 3 competitors for the axe holds. Honestly the Saab loyalists are few and far between, and so are their dealerships. However Saab doesn't produce a lot of vehicles and that is a plus for GM, they can cut one of the other 3 that seem to be doing a lot of bumping in to each other.

Buick is the next obvious choice. Older loyalists, declining sales, the prejudice that Buick holds lack of excitement just seems like it'll never go away. 4 doors on a vehicle with power less than 300HP automatically means no excitement. This could easily be remedied if given a halo vehicle with either 2 doors or more than 300+ HP sedan that is RWD. The fact is as much as everybody has been wanting Buick to fail the last few years it has only surprised us. The Rendezvous has oversold what they've expected, the LaCrosse is doing very good, and the Lucerne seems to be everything people have wanted in a fullsize sedan that wasn't in the LeSabre (which was the number one full size sedan in that price range) all for a good price. The Enclave has been greeted with nothing less than awe by any one who has seen it. Atop of it all they are GM's top brand for quality amongst other things, they even exceed Cadillac. Buick is the brand that keeps GM from being a company that doesn't make Top 5 brand quality and satisfaction, and thats a pretty powerful hold in a holding division that many people seem to overlook. Everything Buick has done as of late has exceeding expectations. Even the average age buyer has significantly dropped and I no longer believe Buick has the oldest brand buyers. The only glaring exception is the halo car missing, and with that staying missing Buick can never generate any excitement and people aren't willing to give Buick a second look, so for that they are easily able to be chopped just because people aren't willing to look at a brand that doesn't have a halo car. Tell me another brand people love that doesnt have a halo car.

Pontiac is right above Buick in safety of the chopping block and this is for one reason: Solstice. For this vehicle alone people are putting their faith in Pontiac that they have a better chance of surviving than the previous 2 mentioned. In fact the exact reason why Buick is below Pontiac on the chopping block is because Pontiac has the one thing Buick doesn't- a halo car. Pontiac doesn't have the quality or satisfaction ratings of Buick but they still are clinging to the "excitement" idea. But where Buick has had high quality and a successful last few years given what they expected Pontiac has not had the same, where the Rendezvous flourished, the Aztek failed. The G6 was expected to be selling much higher than it originally started with and the GTO was another initial failure. Personal feelings on the vehicles aside Pontiac wasn't selling as much as they expected. The Grand Prix seems to be doing alright but is starting to wain in age, and the Torrent is still too early to tell... however you have to go 3 pages back in the Pontiac C&G archive to even get a full discussion on it. Pontiac doesn't have Buicks quality or satisfaction or a better outlook on sales for overall vehicles (though Pontiac naturally sells more, but now both Pontiac and Buick are being shrinked to selling about the same amount of vehicles) and to top it all off- Saturn seems to be filling the gap of Oldsmobile and competing with Pontiac slightly, much more than it is competing with Buick... But Pontiac has that halo car and that almost seems worth more than any quality or satisfaction, because it keeps people wanting a Pontiac.

Then there's Saturn, seemingly the safest of the 4 possible chop block brands. And undoubtably 80% of C&Gers are saying "What the hell!" 5 years ago it'd be hard for any one of us to find a reason to keep Saturn. With only 2 vehicles that hardly changed for a damn decade that seemed to only appeal to women and was a failed import fighter brand built almost completely out of plastic which was not a trend that caught on well, and on top of that a low quality and reliability rating... Saturn should have been the first to go and many of us, 5 years later, still think it should be the first to go... but something amazing has happened... Saturn is now fully GM incorporated and is finding itself not only right in Oldsmobile's deserved spot, but is the only brand that isn't one of GM's "safe" brands that everyone can agree on that it is a relatively safe brand. You're hard pressed to find someone who doesn't think the Aura is a perfect car and the Sky all over a sudden overshadows the Solstice. And mysteriously Saturn wasn't sentenced to the same dealership constraints that Buick and Pontiac were both sentenced to... in fact it seems if there's a hot item that is being kicked around GM somehow Saturn gets its grubby little hands in on it, as if it has the seniority over Pontiac or Buick. Saturn still holds many of its stigma of the past, much as Buick still has the stigma of being an old persons vehicle, Saturn has people thinking they're poor quality, cheap, poor import fighting vehicles... But Saturn has a sports division (Red line) now and they're going to be GM's brand to start out with the alternative fuel sources (Green line) which is completely innovative... Saturn is hardly even an option to consider chopping with everything it's doing for GM... but it is also the weakest brand reputation. It has one the lowest quality and satisfaction ratings for GM, but GM doesn't seem to let this bother them. Saturn could easily start to replace Pontiac or Buick had either of them be chopped. It seems like it'd be more comfortable in Pontiac's spot because they both focus on sport and not as much on quality and are in the same price range where Saturn would have to make more expensive vehicles to fit in Buick's spot with the exact opposite reputation of Buick in its spot. However if you cut Saturn you will keep MOST of the GM loyalists... if you cut Buick or Pontiac you will see a lot of people give up on GM for good, me being one of them.


Personally- I'd like to see Chevy go (some bitter sarcasm there for ya). When you have identical front ends for your Impala and Monte Carlo there is nothing good coming out of the company. GM stands to lose a lot cutting any of the brands (aside from Saab, but Saab might not be enough to cut) and the wrong cut could seal the death of the once most powerful auto company in the world... (I dont consider any auto company on the brink of bankruptcy the most powerful auto company in the world anymore) Edited November 27, 2005 by Cananopie

[4gm]

The only glaring exception is the halo car missing, and with that staying missing Buick can never generate any excitement and people aren't willing to give Buick a second look, so for that they are easily able to be chopped just because people aren't willing to look at a brand that doesn't have a halo car. Tell me another brand people love that doesnt have a halo car.

[post="49148"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

GM needs another halo car like it needs more pension obligations. What the General needs across all its divisions are for their mainstream vehicles to be alluring enough so that they don't feel the need to prop up a division with some bright and shiny halo car. It's the equivalent of saying, "we hope you're distracted enough by this halo car to not notice that our other cars suffer from perpetual mediocrity". Chevy has the Corvette and SSR but that hasn't translated into people running en masse to buy the Malibu. Fleet sales don't count.

Does Honda's roadster count as a halo car? Even if it does, Honda's had a very loyal following before they started selling it. How many halo cars does Toyota have? Edited November 27, 2005 by 4gm

[Cory Wolfe]

Gee thanks. <_<

Seriously, Buick or Saab should be deep sixed.

Oh.. forgot to put "excluding AH-HA". :P I've just never really included in that group of people, though. I didn't mean it for you because of that. Also because you never really say the crap that they do. So... sorry, but I don't think highly of your job. Roast me if you may...

Anyways, I never thought of Saab as a GM brand in the first place. Getting rid of it would quite alright with me. I don't car for it. It's just in the way...

[Ghost Dog]

And GMNA won't have the Production Capacity for Both Pontiac and Buick with the cuts. The only way they Survive is badging Offshore Vehicles. (UGH)

[Cananopie]

Does Honda's roadster count as a halo car?  Even if it does, Honda's had a very loyal following before they started selling it.  How many halo cars does Toyota have?

[post="49173"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Honda and Toyota both have vehicles that generate excitement as the S2000 for Honda or even the Celica or until recenty the MR2 Spyder. The point is both these companies have their luxury version- Acura and Lexus... GM doesn't work that way. GM is a holding company and doesn't even make cars truly bearing the name. Toyota makes cars, Honda makes cars, Toyota makes Lexus, Lexus is OF Toyota...

Buick is not OF Chevy.
Pontiac is not OF Chevy.
Cadillac is not OF Chevy.
Chevy does not make Buicks and Pontiacs and Cadillacs. They are each truly seperate companies all trying to work together to gain as much of the market as possible. So if Toyota wants a really expensive Halo car they make a Lexus and, ultimately, Toyota makes the money. If Cadillac makes the same type of car the money doesn't necessarily go to Chevy, it goes to GM. Each company is made to remain profitable by itself, if Lexus doesn't sell well it is Toyota losing the money, if Toyota offs Lexus they are giving away their fight in the upper market division all together... if Buick doesn't sell well then they can chop Buick. Buick doesn't have the luxury of massive Chevy sales or Cadillac sales supporting them, if Buick isn't profitable then Buick doesn't get to stay, they can just make lower end Cadillacs or upper end Saturns to replace the gap...

So Buick DOES need a halo car to produce interest. Toyota and Honda both get their interest with their only other company. It's not that Buick is making poor cars- they are higher in quality and satisfaction than any other GM company... but people don't look at Buick because Buick is not an extension of Chevy, Pontiac, or Cadillac, where their reputation already gets attached to the only other company. Buick needs an exciting car so people will say "Buick isn't boring," Buick doesn't need to improve on its quality and reputation, they're practically spotless- they need to improve only on interest. and exciting cars generate interest. and yea- even something as "not halo-car-esque" as the Celica gives that reputation to a company because they are appealing to those who like 2 door vehicles which is a completely new, seperate, and younger market than Buick is appealing to now and is something that can help people take a second look at it.

[4gm]

Cananopie, my point is this: the way for a car company, or division of a car company, to generate interest in its products is to make their bread and butter vehicles interesting and alluring enough to buyers so that their is no need for a halo vehicle to try and bump up interest in the brand. These halo vehicles should be an afterthought and only made after a brand has its crap together. The Sky isn't going to make the Ion beautiful. The Corvette didn't make the Malibu's old front end not look hideous. The Solstice isn't going to make the proportions on the G6 coupe not look totally out of whack. For years GM has given its brands various halo vehicles in hopes that they'd increase interest in them and it hasn't worked.

[daves87rs]

In all fairness, the safe companies are, in this order:

Chevrolet
Cadillac
GMC
Hummer

I don't even think there was a slight utterance of the dismissal of these 4 brands.

Saturn
Pontiac
Buick
Saab

in that order those are the 4 unsafe brands, from safest to unsafest, but all have at least 1 reason to be dismissed.

Saab seems like the easiest choice to get rid of. Saab doesn't sell the cars any of the other brands do and Saab doesn't hold the fanbase any of the other 3 competitors for the axe holds. Honestly the Saab loyalists are few and far between, and so are their dealerships. However Saab doesn't produce a lot of vehicles and that is a plus for GM, they can cut one of the other 3 that seem to be doing a lot of bumping in to each other.

Buick is the next obvious choice. Older loyalists, declining sales, the prejudice that Buick holds lack of excitement just seems like it'll never go away. 4 doors on a vehicle with power less than 300HP automatically means no excitement. This could easily be remedied if given a halo vehicle with either 2 doors or more than 300+ HP sedan that is RWD. The fact is as much as everybody has been wanting Buick to fail the last few years it has only surprised us. The Rendezvous has oversold what they've expected, the LaCrosse is doing very good, and the Lucerne seems to be everything people have wanted in a fullsize sedan that wasn't in the LeSabre (which was the number one full size sedan in that price range) all for a good price. The Enclave has been greeted with nothing less than awe by any one who has seen it. Atop of it all they are GM's top brand for quality amongst other things, they even exceed Cadillac. Buick is the brand that keeps GM from being a company that doesn't make Top 5 brand quality and satisfaction, and thats a pretty powerful hold in a holding division that many people seem to overlook. Everything Buick has done as of late has exceeding expectations. Even the average age buyer has significantly dropped and I no longer believe Buick has the oldest brand buyers. The only glaring exception is the halo car missing, and with that staying missing Buick can never generate any excitement and people aren't willing to give Buick a second look, so for that they are easily able to be chopped just because people aren't willing to look at a brand that doesn't have a halo car. Tell me another brand people love that doesnt have a halo car.

Pontiac is right above Buick in safety of the chopping block and this is for one reason: Solstice. For this vehicle alone people are putting their faith in Pontiac that they have a better chance of surviving than the previous 2 mentioned. In fact the exact reason why Buick is below Pontiac on the chopping block is because Pontiac has the one thing Buick doesn't- a halo car. Pontiac doesn't have the quality or satisfaction ratings of Buick but they still are clinging to the "excitement" idea. But where Buick has had high quality and a successful last few years given what they expected Pontiac has not had the same, where the Rendezvous flourished, the Aztek failed. The G6 was expected to be selling much higher than it originally started with and the GTO was another initial failure. Personal feelings on the vehicles aside Pontiac wasn't selling as much as they expected. The Grand Prix seems to be doing alright but is starting to wain in age, and the Torrent is still too early to tell... however you have to go 3 pages back in the Pontiac C&G archive to even get a full discussion on it.  Pontiac doesn't have Buicks quality or satisfaction or a better outlook on sales for overall vehicles (though Pontiac naturally sells more, but now both Pontiac and Buick are being shrinked to selling about the same amount of vehicles) and to top it all off- Saturn seems to be filling the gap of Oldsmobile and competing with Pontiac slightly, much more than it is competing with Buick... But Pontiac has that halo car and that almost seems worth more than any quality or satisfaction, because it keeps people wanting a Pontiac.

Then there's Saturn, seemingly the safest of the 4 possible chop block brands. And undoubtably 80% of C&Gers are saying "What the hell!" 5 years ago it'd be hard for any one of us to find a reason to keep Saturn. With only 2 vehicles that hardly changed for a damn decade that seemed to only appeal to women and was a failed import fighter brand built almost completely out of plastic which was not a trend that caught on well, and on top of that a low quality and reliability rating... Saturn should have been the first to go and many of us, 5 years later, still think it should be the first to go... but something amazing has happened... Saturn is now fully GM incorporated and is finding itself not only right in Oldsmobile's deserved spot, but is the only brand that isn't one of GM's "safe" brands that everyone can agree on that it is a relatively safe brand. You're hard pressed to find someone who doesn't think the Aura is a perfect car and the Sky all over a sudden overshadows the Solstice. And mysteriously Saturn wasn't sentenced to the same dealership constraints that Buick and Pontiac were both sentenced to... in fact it seems if there's a hot item that is being kicked around GM somehow Saturn gets its grubby little hands in on it, as if it has the seniority over Pontiac or Buick. Saturn still holds many of its stigma of the past, much as Buick still has the stigma of being an old persons vehicle, Saturn has people thinking they're poor quality, cheap, poor import fighting vehicles... But Saturn has a sports division (Red line) now and they're going to be GM's brand to start out with the alternative fuel sources (Green line) which is completely innovative... Saturn is hardly even an option to consider chopping with everything it's doing for GM... but it is also the weakest brand reputation. It has one the lowest quality and satisfaction ratings for GM, but GM doesn't seem to let this bother them. Saturn could easily start to replace Pontiac or Buick had either of them be chopped. It seems like it'd be more comfortable in Pontiac's spot because they both focus on sport and not as much on quality and are in the same price range where Saturn would have to make more expensive vehicles to fit in Buick's spot with the exact opposite reputation of Buick in its spot. However if you cut Saturn you will keep MOST of the GM loyalists... if you cut Buick or Pontiac you will see a lot of people give up on GM for good, me being one of them.
Personally- I'd like to see Chevy go (some bitter sarcasm there for ya). When you have identical front ends for your Impala and Monte Carlo there is nothing good coming out of the company. GM stands to lose a lot cutting any of the brands (aside from Saab, but Saab might not be enough to cut) and the wrong cut could seal the death of the once most powerful auto company in the world... (I dont consider any auto company on the brink of bankruptcy the most powerful auto company in the world anymore)

[post="49148"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Wow- good read..and some good points... :)

[daves87rs]

Cananopie, my point is this: the way for a car company, or division of a car company, to generate interest in its products is to make their bread and butter vehicles interesting and alluring enough to buyers so that their is no need for a halo vehicle to try and bump up interest in the brand.  These halo vehicles should be an afterthought and only made after a brand has its crap together.  The Sky isn't going to make the Ion beautiful.  The Corvette didn't make the Malibu's old front end not look hideous.  The Solstice isn't going to make the proportions on the G6 coupe not look totally out of whack. 

For years GM has given its brands various halo vehicles in hopes that they'd increase interest in them and it hasn't worked.

[post="49260"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Every car company has a halo car....

You would be hard pressed to tell me that Corollas don't sell because of the Pruis..
and so on...

And keep in mind it takes time to change...DCX would be a good example...

[Cananopie]

Every car company has a halo car....

You would be hard pressed to tell me that Corollas don't sell because of the Pruis..
and so on...

And keep in mind it takes time to change...DCX would be a good example...

[post="49287"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Exactly- I didn't even think about the Prius or the Insight or the Civic. These are vehicles that get their respect from their fuel efficiency even if they aren't high end luxury. If Buick recieved an alternative energy vehicle or a vehicle with better gas mileage than anybody else that'd be considered a halo car because it stands out and says something about the company.

Does that mean Toyota doesn't make Avalons and Corollas? Very similar cars that Buick sells and disputable as to which is the better deal with better quality. Buick simply needs that car that stands out- in any way shape or form- from the rest... it's just more typical to see a RWD/300+HP/coupe (circle one or any combination of them) be a GM halo car.

The halo car is the promise of similar style, quality, efficiency, or power in any car from that brand... think of Corvette to Cobalt or GTO to Grand Prix Civic to Accord Prius to Corolla, 350Z to Maxima... Velite to Lucerne would've fit quite well. The halo car is the pinnacle of what that company can be... and all the other vehicles carry the essence of the halo vehicle. The fact that Buick can even function without a halo car shows how much it should stay (especially since its previous halo car was not nearly as breathtaking as most halo cars for companies) Edited November 28, 2005 by Cananopie

[Chicagoland]

Oldsmobile was my brand, and now it's gone.  Buick was also one of my favorite brands because there were so many Buicks in the past that I liked--the G-body Regal, the '90 Park Avenue, '79 Riviera, '87 LeSabre T-Type, '86 Buick Century T-Type, '80 Buick Skyhawk, plus the classic Buicks like the Wildcat and Boattail Riviera.  However, I started losing interest after the T-Types went away and it seemed that Buick was just trying to meet the needs of the geriatric set.  The newer Buicks are doing a better job of attracting buyers in their 40's, but I just don't find a whole lot that's special about them, like a Velite would be.

[post="48679"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

You show a valid point. A GM loyalist embraces badges, while the real world couldn't care less about 100 year old names and the same car offered at other GM brands.

All the Buicks mentioned above (except the Rivs and Wildcat) were cookie cutter cars, especially the Skyhawk and Century, with just different trim. [The '90 PA was still the bland Box, the 1991-96 was better.]

But to someone who just wants the best car for their $, they are not goign to base buying decision on brand name trim.

No more badge jobs like the U body vans and Equinox/Torrnent, but more differentiation like the G body Lucurne an DTS or the GP and LaCrosse.

[Chicagoland]

"Chevy does not make Buicks and Pontiacs and Cadillacs" No, GM makes the cars!!!!!! Go to most GM plants and you will see that the Buick Lucerne is made along side the DTS, and the GP is makde with the Impala and LaCrosse. And the precious Olds Alero was on the line with the Grand Am. Do people actually think that Chevy and Buikc still design and make all separate parts, and all?? People who still think the divisions are 'car companies" better wake up and smell reality. This kind of "fiefdom" thinking is what contributed to GM's slide. Edited November 28, 2005 by Chicagoland

[91z4me]

"Chevy does not make Buicks and Pontiacs and Cadillacs"

No, GM makes the cars!!!!!! Go to most GM plants and you will see that the Buick Lucerne is made along side the DTS, and the GP is makde with the Impala and LaCrosse. And the precious Olds Alero was on the line with the Grand Am. Do people actually think that Chevy and Buikc still design and make all separate parts, and all??
People who still think the divisions are 'car companies" better wake up and smell reality. This kind of "fiefdom" thinking is what contributed to GM's slide.

[post="49468"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

In reality a better way to think of GM brands is to consider them marketing divisions. GM builds the cars that its marketing entities market and they are sold by dealers. Chevy doesn't sell the actual cars the dealers do and that limits the control of Chevy, the marketing division, and GM, the producer.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

[quote name='AH-HA' date='Nov 26 2005, 11:55 AM']Gee thanks.   <_<

Seriously, Buick or Saab should be deep sixed.

[post="48780"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

[/quote]

I'll politely disagree.

But, that said, you know things about the industry. A lot of these analysts or journalists are just looking to make headlines.

[quote]ah, but Saab is one of GM's only global players, and has potential for a much stronger presence in Europe.[/quote]

I agree... GM is doing well at regaining it's foothold in Europe, to 'off' Saab would put a major kink in things and could possibly hinder GME... So then we'd have a GMNA crisis (because I don't think offing a division, especially one as small as Saab is going to make much of a difference anyway) and possibly a GME crisis in a few years. Or at least it would seem that way. The wild card would be Cadillac and maybe Buick to a lesser extent. Exactly how close is a growing Cadillac presence in Europe going to be positioned to where Saab is or would've been if it were sold off? Or, better yet, to secure a stronger future for Buick, why not begin exporting them to Europe as a mid-level division with "style" I once read that Buick were very popular in some trendsetting European places such as France.

[quote]Trying to think from a GM exec's perspective, I don't really see a reason to cut any of the brands. Hummer is profit central, and has a great future as long as they can continue to execute Hummers with undeniable Hummerness.[/quote]

Exactly... Hummer to GM is a name and a badge job. They license the name and put it on variations of already existing product if I'm not mistaken. So how much would ditching Hummer save?

[quote]Buick, Pontiac, and GMC, well they can continue to coexist happily in the dealerships, and will most definitely, as long as the right products are introduced, increase volume, not decrease.[/quote]

Therein lies the big issue.... Each of these divisions HAS a share of the market and if the merger goes well, they should thrive. Why give that up? Not to count, that'd be a lot of pissed of GM dealers. These "profit tomorrow, not later" hacks don't care about the future... They want GM to make money NOW! Then, in a few years when GM has a flawed product strategy because they axed a division to appease Wall Street, the very same hacks will be whining for GM to cut another division and chastising them for not being competitive.

Could you imagine the headlines if GM were to axe Buick, it's founding division?

[quote]Saturn has a bright future thanks to great products and hopefully an expanding dealer base.[/quote]

Mark my words, Saturn will not be cut... There is too much growth potential in Saturn.

[quote]Saab is doing poorly, but only has two, outdated, fully Saab-like vehicles. Saab has been hemorraging for a long time, but has never been given a chance to succeed, much like Buick, or been given the wrong chances, much like any GM brand.[/quote]

SPOT ON!

[quote]Buick/Pontiac Could Share Developement costs with GM Asia Pacific. Global Platforms. One Vehicle on Each Platform.[/quote]

Holden :)

[prototype66]

Im still of the opinion that the best thing to do is to condence product to those that coinside with the discriptive embodiment of said division. Saturn/(olds) tech and innovation Buick/ high end affordable quality pontiac/ high proformance gmc/ high end utility saab/ capture euro customers ditch multiples and over laping non discriptive vehicles in the wrong divisions.Why 4 minivans?Etc....3 to 4 per brand pining down the neich cars and thats all! And quit trying to see how many you can make and concentrate on building them right!

[Matt276]

Pontiac/Buick/GMC are one brand now. Why not merge Saab and Saturn dealers like in Canada?

[prototype66]

Pontiac/Buick/GMC are one brand now. Why not merge Saab and Saturn dealers like in Canada?

[post="49555"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Right , therefore PBG dealerships can NOT have cookie cutter badges.
True?

[Cananopie]

"Chevy does not make Buicks and Pontiacs and Cadillacs"

No, GM makes the cars!!!!!! Go to most GM plants and you will see that the Buick Lucerne is made along side the DTS, and the GP is makde with the Impala and LaCrosse. And the precious Olds Alero was on the line with the Grand Am. Do people actually think that Chevy and Buikc still design and make all separate parts, and all??
People who still think the divisions are 'car companies" better wake up and smell reality. This kind of "fiefdom" thinking is what contributed to GM's slide.

[post="49468"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I know- I even said in that same post GM makes the cars. In fact I said this:

"GM is a holding company and doesn't even make cars truly bearing the name (of GM)."

and

"They are each truly seperate companies all trying to work together to gain as much of the market as possible."

Without these venerable names GM wouldn't be able to sell cars under them. I know each brand doesnt have their own factory anymore, but if GM cuts one of them the name could be picked up by someone else (Think of how Ford picked up Jaguar). So these companies are not born and dead by GM, but they are close. It's because GM coordinating how they are made and what each company does so they can "gain as much of the market as possible" as I said. GM has always had a presence in each brands decision as soon as each jumped on board, just because it's a stronger presence now doesn't mean that Buick or Pontiac were more "on their own" in the 70s or 50s. GM still had the ultimate power over them and could say no to anything. They still had to build on similar platforms just as they do today. No doubt GM has each brand by the balls, but each brand still stands for something by itself and it is why there is still brand loyalty.

AND if any of the brands start becoming unprofitable it is that brands problem, it is not Chevy's problem if Buick becomes unprofitable so the mass amounts of money brought in by Chevy can still go back to Chevy, it is whatever is leftover and put in to GM as a reserve that can go in to Buick to help save it but it is no other brands concern because they can just axe Buick. Toyota, Nissan, Volkwagen, Honda only have 2 companies and they need to care equally about both.

[chrominium steel]

Is Daewoo profitable?

[91z4me]

Is Daewoo profitable?

[post="49611"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Yes and it will become more profitable each year that the Chinese market grows. The Korean market is also doing quite well. With Daewoo's lower cost for engineering I could see them becoming very integral to small car sales and design in the future.

[BIGPhil]

I think they need to look at who the competition is for each brand and try to minimize brands competing against the same brand. They said that: Buick was supposed to go after Lexus, Infinti, and Acura (to be a Japanese Lux fighter i.e., the high quality) Cadillac was supposed to go after the Premium Lux market (Mercedes, BMW and eventually move upscale to after the likes of Rolls and Maybach) Chevy was and is their "working man's brand" they tend to have the biggest selection and GM uses this brand to bring in customers ( They have GM's least expensive vehicle $9995) and they allow their wide selection to bring customers in, and work them up and through the other GM brands Saturn was supposed to be the brand that would take on the likes of Honda and Toyota. One price. AND minimal rebates. GMC has always been TRUCKVILLE. They have always been the truck brand. Getting the best of GM's truck technology. HUMMER........ Okay all do respect, something about a truck that can climb a small verticle wall and tow an insane amount of weight is just awesome but ......... WHY? I know that it is a very profitable brand, But why? Yes it has the look. but what other purpose does it have? who does it compete against. What market is it targeting? What other players are there? Saab....... Saab imo should go after the likes of Volvo. And yes origin has something to do with it. Saab should have advanced safety technology and a certain "scandinavian" feel to it. I think Saab buyers a just as unique as Volvo buyers. Pontiac was the sports division of the family. I believe the problem with Pontiac are 1) Horsepower 2) Driver feel 3) Design. They should have HP numbers above all other GM divisions (excluding Corvette) and they should only have performance minded vehicles (i.e., NO Minivan, NO SUV, NO crossover.) thats just my opinion. Just another tidbit for thought. EVERY GM DIVISION SHOULD HAVE A HALO VEHICLE. As posted earlier a HALO vehicle is supposed to be the true, all out, expression that signifies what THAT particular nameplate is. There is no law/rule that it has to be a sports car/two-door. Its an expression showing what makes you the bset at what you do and why people should buy from your nameplate. Edited November 28, 2005 by BIGPhil

[prototype66]

I think they need to look at who the competition is for each brand and try to minimize brands competing against the same brand.

They said that:

Buick was supposed to go after Lexus, Infinti, and Acura (to be a Japanese Lux fighter i.e., the high quality)

Cadillac was supposed to go after the Premium Lux market (Mercedes, BMW and eventually move upscale to after the likes of Rolls and Maybach)

Chevy was and is their "working man's brand" they tend to have the biggest selection and GM uses this brand to bring in customers ( They have GM's least expensive vehicle $9995) and they allow their wide selection to bring customers in, and work them up and through the other GM brands

Saturn was supposed to be the brand that would take on the likes of Honda and Toyota. One price. AND minimal rebates.

!

GMC has always been TRUCKVILLE. They have always been the truck brand. Getting the best of GM's truck technology.

HUMMER........ Okay all do respect, something about a truck that can climb a small verticle wall and tow an insane amount of weight is just awesome but ......... WHY? I know that it is a very profitable brand, But why?  Yes it has the look. but what other purpose does it have? who does it compete against. What market is it targeting? What other players are there?

Saab....... Saab imo should go after the likes of Volvo. And yes origin has something to do with it. Saab should have advanced safety technology and a certain "scandinavian" feel to it. I think Saab buyers a just as unique as Volvo buyers.

Pontiac was the sports division of the family. I believe the problem with Pontiac are 1) Horsepower  2) Driver feel  3) Design. They should have HP numbers above all other GM divisions (excluding Corvette) and they should only have performance minded vehicles (i.e., NO Minivan, NO SUV, NO crossover.) thats just my opinion.

Just another tidbit for thought. EVERY GM DIVISION SHOULD HAVE A HALO VEHICLE.

As posted earlier a HALO vehicle is supposed to be the true, all out, expression that signifies what THAT particular nameplate is. There is no law/rule that it has to be a sports car/two-door. Its an expression showing what makes you the bset at what you do and why people should buy from your nameplate.

[post="49647"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

YES YES YYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS! :P Edited November 28, 2005 by prototype66

[razoredge]

Well being how everytime someone wants to bash GM for poor cars the Cavalier, Malibu, Impala, Monty Carlo seem to be the cars that are thrown in our faces. Then being how everyones mad because Chevy doesnt have a Camaro I say........ screw em, chop Chevy and saturin, then Buick will have more than enough R&D funding. :rolleyes: Just kiddin Chevy, but I am getting tired of having those lowly cars thrown in my face. Just get saturin out of the way and everything will be fine again. saturin and their dealerships have failed, they need to be axed, no excuses. Saab in Europe is a good thing, its also a good outlet. Say what you want about Saab but I have never heard anyone say they were junk. In fact I was always of the understanding that they were excellent cars. No body knows what saturin is, saturin has nothing going on. Everyone and anybody will always say how near impossible it is today to start a new car company, yet GM feels the need to pursue this boondoggle while everything else is going down the drain.